|
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
A favorite tactic of counterfeiters is, after having created the fake, to induce a prestigious museum to display it for a period of time. If one is selling, say, a Ruth item, it makes for a great story to say the item comes directly from the Babe Ruth museum. But unless one knows the history of how the museum got it and its prior provenance, having been on display at the museum in and of itself means essentially nothing. To the point that provenance can be faked, that is absolutely correct. There have also been instances where fake items came directly from the descendants of former players. Often they would "seed" the fake in with genuine items in order to induce a prospective purchaser to lower his/her guard. Or the seeding would be done not by the family but by the person who bought genuine items from the family. Bottom line -- there is a lot of great genuine stuff out there to enjoy, but as the prices of really good stuff continue to rise, one must be more and more careful in deciding whether the item is real. I think it might have been Jay Miller who used the term "suspended disbelief" to characterize the mind set of a person who sees an opportunity to purchase his/her dream item. The person so badly wants the item to be real that he/she loses his/her ability to objectively evaluate it. Last edited by benjulmag; 07-10-2019 at 12:16 PM. |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Physical examination sometimes has shown that the provenance is fake. Works both ways.
An example of provenance that doesn't prove but is helpful is a baseball bat that comes from a team or the player's family. It doesn't prove the bat was game used or a even game model, but, in conjunction with physical examination helps show that the bat was game used by the player. I know with modern (Post 1987?) MLB jerseys, an era when retail and team-issued jerseys can be identical, MEARS won't give a grade above 5 without team or like provenance. I think photomatching for game used items is good, but am a bit wary of it and don't think it should be used as be all and end all. I think there will be, if there hasn't already been, trickery there. I also think "that the pinstripes match up" is useful information, but don't know that that's the final arbiter. There have been no scientific studies of that area, just assumptions. Last edited by drcy; 07-10-2019 at 12:39 PM. |
![]() |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Industry confronts allegations of card doctoring | kevlar7 | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 32 | 07-07-2019 06:01 AM |
| Card doctoring... | Peter_Spaeth | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 142 | 01-25-2018 01:52 PM |
| Speaking of card doctoring... | seablaster | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 6 | 12-01-2012 08:10 PM |
| What Do You Consider Card Doctoring? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 58 | 05-15-2008 12:44 PM |
| 1988 Card Doctoring article | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 1 | 10-29-2006 05:07 PM |